Is there anyone advancing the argument that racism is right?
Yes unfortunately there is still a great deal of hate and violence against those who are gay or suspected to be gay. The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual sex is sinful, but it does not condemn a person for having a same-sex attraction if they do not act out on it. It also teaches that all people, including those with a homosexual orientation are to be treated with love, dignity and respect. It is possible to speak out about God’s true design for sex as within the sacrament of marriage between husband and wife without being violent or hateful to those who are struggling with this issue. Such violence would be sinful.
I most certainly would! When you have the truth of Scripture, it’s historical context, it’s original language, and the biblical facts on your side, I can absolutely assure you that I would be more than willing to take anyone of “these Traditions of man” on. You and they don’t intimadate me in the slightest, buffalo!
I’m sorry but the evidence is to the contrary. All one has to do is look at the history of how different attempts have been made throughout the history of bible translations to see that this is not so. In 1. Cor. 6:9, you will find that when the dishonest term “homosexual” began to infect the scriptures, it took on the form “homosexual” with no other qualifiers before it or after it to distinguish that it was only talking about practicing homosexuals, as you claim. Later, different translations attempting to modiy their alteration used terms like “those who practice homosexuality”, “homosexual offenders”, “those who participate in homosexuality”. In fact if you look at the New King James Version, you will find that it uses the clearly dishonest and unscriptural term “sodomite.” This in itself is interesting, because if one presumes the false assumption that Sodom was destroyed because of homosexuality, the interesting thing is nowhere in Genesis or Jude is their any mention of “homosexual sex”, as you termed it. So in subscribing to what you wrote, you would have to conclude that Sodom got destroyed, not because of “homosexual sex” but rather for same-sex attraction. And that would clearly contradict your reasoning. When you look at the way people with a same-sex orientation have been treated throughout the ages, and consider the influence the Catholic Church has had within it’s historic writings in molding the prejudices towards gays, the warped imagery that the Christian society has regarding homosexuality is in every way influeced by the Catholic Church and its representatives. I’m sorry but your post above grossly distorts and oversimplifies the history between Catholicism and homosexuality, regardless of the current rhetoric of today’s Cathecism.
Before you lay out tired arguments here they are thoroughly refuted.
Well, let’s just see how tired my “arguments” are, shall we? I’ll start with Sodom and Gomorrah. At what point in history did the Catholic church associate this story with homosexuality?
It was understand all the way through. Everyone knew and knows the anus is not a sex organ.
You did not answer my question!!!
"Now I desire to remind you, though you were once for all fully informed, that he who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels that did not keep their own position but left their proper dwelling have been kept by him in eternal chains in the nether gloom until the judgment of the great day; just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 3-7)
I’m not entirely sure I follow your response. I agree with you that the Sodom passage in the Old Testament is not very clear that sex between two people of the same sex is what was targeted. However there are other biblical passages that are much more direct.
Once again, you are continuing to avoid my questions with noise. This is your choice and I obviously can’t force you not to. If you want to discuss Jude and its relevance to homosexuality fine, so do I. Afterall this is only another element of our overall discussion. But the fact that you are willing to try to divert from directly answering my so called “tired arguments”, shows just how effective they can be in getting to the truth of this homosexuality discussion. But since you brought up Jude, I will use this post of yours to again ask my two questions:
Would an example of a “more direct” passage be 1. Cor. 6:9 where some translators use the term “sodomite”?
I noticed that but where do you take exception with my comments. Last time I checked we were on the same team.
I have answered right from the beginning with one citation. Perhaps I do not understand your question.
great post
Did you post a response? Yes. Did you answer the question? Hardly! If you find the question hard to understand, then you’ll more than likely find the truth as preserved in scripture regarding “homosexuality” hard to understand as well. Despite this, this will not stop me from challanging the unscriptural falacies you present clothed in the garments of Catholic Teaching.
Then proceed. Make you affirmative case.
I’m not letting you off that easily. I want an answer to the two questions I posted. This is me proceeding to make my case. So please don’t try to get out of this by either taking the fifth or pleading insanity.
I will try my best.
Let’s try to stay focused on the question okay? Right now, we are talking about homosexuality and Sodom and Gomorrah. You mentioned Jewish tradition. Well, my question is very simple: Did Jewish Tradition associate these cities with homosexuality like “Christians” today do?